A table that
breaks down states by income, average IQ, and whether they voted for Bush or Gore has been making the rounds. It appears to show, pretty dramatically, that the states with higher average incomes, and higher average IQs, voted for Gore. Whereas the lower income, lower IQ states went for Bush. The comment accompanying this table is usually 'Come to your own conclusions," or something like that. My first thought, on seeing this, was that it's awfully similar to the
Lovenstein Institute IQ Report. But I suspect that the figures, in this case, might be correct... in the sense that they were produced by actual research, not just invented out of whole cloth. They appear to derive from a book published in 2002 titled
IQ and the Wealth of Nations by Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen. I haven't actually seen a copy of this book (and since it costs $81.95 I'm probably not going to either unless I find it at the library). But the real question here seems to be whether, even if 'actual' research produced these IQ figures, do they mean anything? I've always been skeptical about IQ tests, so I would say 'No, they don't.' And I'm saying this even though I'm a Democrat.
Update: The IQ figures do not come from
IQ and the Wealth of Nations, as confirmed by Richard Lynn, the book's author, whom I emailed to inquire about this. Therefore, it seems right now that the figures have actually been pulled out of thin air. In other words, it's a hoax. But it looks like
The American Assembler fell for it, among others.
Update 2: The person responsible for the hoax appears to be a guy named Robert Calvert who posted the data to a
Mensa newsgroup back in 2002. Presumably he did make the data up, since I haven't been able to find any info anywhere that would corroborate it.
Comments
Say what you like bout Bush, but at least, the country is moving towards real morale values.
Which is better:
Low Moral Values, extreme immorality and aborminations = High IQ
or
High Moral values, decent country with real values = low IQ?
And in my opinion, if you vote for Bush, you gotta have shit for brains or be right on the top and be doing everything to keep everybody on the bottom. I mean, look at that guy.
As far as middle-class suburbanites voting for the GOP, I think that's been pretty much been obliterated by the incredible prosperity and peace of the Clinton years coupled with the abomination that is Bush.
But this disaster of an administration isn't a "Republican" thing, it's a Bush thing. Can anyone imagine John McCain creating such a mess of our country? I highly doubt it. And there's nothing intrinsically wrong with conservatism, though it tends to slow down progress on issues that are critical to our society and to our planet. This situation is simply the result of having an idiot as a president.
Though the vast majority of the wealthy vote Republican, there are those few incredible humanists who have loftier goals than simply avoiding taxes and keeping "foreigners" down or keeping them out of the U.S. But their influence is so much greater than simply who they vote for.
Olivier, your statement implies that bombing innocent men, women and children is more moral than getting blowjobs in the White House and then lying about it. The hypocrisy I see in "church-going" people probably like yourself is painfully apparent. I truly hope that someday organized religion is seen for what it really is...mind control of the masses. I look at organized religion as being as dangerous as global warming as it results in the election of people as dangerously stupid as Bush.
From Neals Boortz's Website:
WHY I THINK VOTING SHOULD BE RESTRICTED
This is one of my favorites. From Alexander Tyler. No, he wasn't writing about the United States. This quote is well over one hundred years old. Tyler was writing about the fall of the Athenian Republic.
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's great civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage."
.....(....).. .Oooo...
......)../.....(....)....
.....(_/.......)../.....
...............(_/....... bush was here
hey, fuck you, you redneck republicans.
stay at walmart you mcdonalds eating nascar hillbillies.
ha!
Is it only me in this argument that finds it quite hilarious about the comparisons between the RNC and DNC? If we're so spiteful, full of hate, and just plain "lousy rednecks", then why, pray tell, were participants at the RNC trampled by LIBERAL PROTESTORS?
I'm sorry, but, correct me if I'm wrong, as I remember, there were only a handful--if any at all--of PEACEFUL demonstrations by the Republicans at the DNC. Now, can somebody please explain to me how this could possibly be? Well, perhaps the answer lies in the simple fact that REPUBLICANS ACTUALLY HAVE JOBS. Whereas quite a lot of Democrats are dependent on government support, via welfare, food stamps, etc.
OH SNAP. How could this be? I mean, I could have sworn that, as Marcos so nicely put it: "hey, fuck you, you redneck republicans. stay at walmart you mcdonalds eating nascar hillbillies." In other words condoning the entire Conservative population as lifeless hillbillies who have brains of mush. Well
butter my butt and call me a biscuit!
Sorry, but I'm not buying that bull. Although I am a church-going woman from the South, I am by no means a hillbilly, redneck, or damn cracker for that matter. Next time, Marcos, dear, please try making up your own mind. Got it?
By the way, I'm not a hick Conservative, I'm from California I live 2 minutes from the beach in Malibu, CA. I want you to know that there are a lot of intelligent Conservatives out there, I have met personally. To just say we are stupid is silly. That is a very immature argument, if you want to pick on Conservatives at least try to do it logically instead of making these huge assumptions that states that voted for Bush are "dumb." I voted for Bush here in Cali, but my vote didn't show that there are smart Conservatives here. I would bet that there are more intelligent people in California and 44% of the vote went Bush this time. I think that is more than last time with Gore. I'm not attacking the validity of the study, since I believe that already to be proven fabricated, but I'm attacking the logic of it in the first place.
I know my IQ to be much higher than what they show as a stupid Conservative. Democrats run off the ticket usually of "We will protect the disadvantaged" this works great, unless you are talking about Conservatives who have lower IQ's huh? This study basically called half the country retarded. Anyways, I want everyone to know that there are Conservatives in more than just the Bible belt, we are active, we are changing things, and yes we have Iq's over 140.
Thanks,
-Shane
Yours as god
Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell
I agree. 10% of all people know THAT.
DOn't blame me. I voted McCain.